Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION [C]. NO.15043 OF2015Padmashree Dr. D.Y. Patil Medical College ... Petitioner Vs. Medical Council of India & Anr. ... Respondents JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present special leave petition aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 5.5.2015 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in L.P.A. No.235/2015 thereby reversing the judgment and order passed by the Single Bench in the matter of increase of seats for MBBS course from 150 to 250 from the academic session 2015-16. The petitioner preferred writ petition before the Single Bench of the High Court of Delhi on being aggrieved by the rejection of its application by the Central Government on the ground that essentiality certificate was not filed along with the application form. The petitioner claimed that it had filed the application for increase in the intake capacity on 30.8.2014. The essentiality certific...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1127 OF2015(Arising out of S.L.P.(Criminal)No.9363/2014) NANHAKU RAM APPELLANT(s) VERSUS STATE OF JHARKHAND RESPONDENT(s) JUDGMENT Leave granted. The conviction and sentence, as confirmed by the High Court of Ranchi in Criminal Appeal No.426 of 2001, is under challenge. The appellant was convicted under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 2 of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 13(2) and for two years under Section 7 of The Prevention and Corruption Act, 1988 with fine. When the matter came up for hearing on 30.03.2015, Notice was issued, limiting the scope to the quantum of sentence. Having regard to the fact that the incident is of the year 1992, the appellant is aged about 65 years and that he is suffering from very serious ailments, we are of the view that the interest of justice would be served if the punishme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 6650 OF2015(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) No.27113 of 2014) STATE OF M.P. ... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS MOHAN LAL ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Leave granted. The respondent was employed as a Chowkidar on daily wage basis and for some reasons he was discontinued in the year 1994. More than 14 years thereafter, he approached the competent authorities under the Industrial Disputes Act and by the Award dated 17.08.2012 passed by the Labour Court, it was directed that he should be reinstated in service without back wages. The said Award has been upheld by the High Court. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the High Court, the appellant has approached this Court. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. In view of the Order dated 15.09.2014 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal No.9675 of 2014 titled as State of M.P. & Anr. vs. Vinod Kumar Tiwari, in our considered opinion, it is a fit case where some compen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.9540-9541 OF2010STANDARD CHARTERED BANK APPELLANT Vs. ANDHRA BANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.The Securities Scam that shook the Bombay Stock Exchange in 1992 took place 23 years ago, yet the Banks and Financial Institutions that were impacted as a result of the scam continue to litigate to recover their rightful damages. The present appeals filed under Section 10 of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 arise out of a transaction which occurred as a part of the same scam, which have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 13.07.2010, as modified by the order dated 07.10.2010 in Suit No.6 of 1994, passed by the Special Court, Bombay, constituted under the above Act. The relevant facts which are required for us to appreciate the rival legal contentions are stated in brief hereunder: The National...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.9540-9541 OF2010STANDARD CHARTERED BANK APPELLANT Vs. ANDHRA BANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.The Securities Scam that shook the Bombay Stock Exchange in 1992 took place 23 years ago, yet the Banks and Financial Institutions that were impacted as a result of the scam continue to litigate to recover their rightful damages. The present appeals filed under Section 10 of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 arise out of a transaction which occurred as a part of the same scam, which have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 13.07.2010, as modified by the order dated 07.10.2010 in Suit No.6 of 1994, passed by the Special Court, Bombay, constituted under the above Act. The relevant facts which are required for us to appreciate the rival legal contentions are stated in brief hereunder: The National...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 6651-6653 OF2015(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) Nos. 14424-14426 of 2015) M/S RAMCHANDRA REXINES (P) LTD AND ORS. ... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE BANGALORE-1 ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties. We have been shown a copy of the Order dated 4.04.2012 passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 11411-11413 of 2011, the same reads as follows: Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants seeks leave to withdraw the appeals with liberty to file an appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, before the High Court. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed. If the appellants file the appeal within eight weeks from today, the same shall be considered by the High Court on merits without reference to the period of limitation. It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6595 OF2015(arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.15513 of 2015) L.C. HANUMANTHAPPA (SINCE DEAD) Appellant(s) REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS. VERSUS H.B. SHIVAKUMAR ...Respondent JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.Leave granted.2. The present case arises out of cross suits filed by the parties. On 9th March, 1990, one L.C. Hanumanthappa filed a suit against one H.B. Shivakumar for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, his servants and agents from disturbing the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. In this suit, namely, O.S. No.1386 of 1990 filed before the City Civil Court, Bangalore, the plaintiff averred that he is the absolute owner, and in lawful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. He also averred in the said suit that the schedule property is clearly distinguishable and could be identified without difficulty. According to the plaintiff, the cause of action arose when th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2866 OF2006CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPOTRATION ... APPELLANT(S) VS. SARPANCH, GRAM PANCHAYAT AND ORS. ... RESPONDENT(S) WITH C.A.NOS. 4368/2006 AND51512007 & C.A.NO.6682/2015 @ SLP(C)NO.19057/2009 JUDGMENT ANIL R. DAVE, J.1. Leave granted in SLP(C)No.19057/2009.2. The dispute raised in these appeals pertains to the dispute on liability to pay tax. The appellant claims that since they have been included in the area carved out of the Gram Panchayat, under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, they are not liable to pay the tax to the Gram Panchayat concerned. When these appeals were heard before us on 16th April, 2015, this Court passed the following order :The short question which is involved in these appeals is whether the land and buildings in question are located within the local limits of three Gram Panchayats, namely, Pagote, Bhendkhal and Kalamboli, in District Raigad. It is the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1105 of 2015 (@ SLP(Crl.) No.7451 of 2014) Fireman Ghulam Mustafa .. Appellant(s) versus State of Uttaranchal (Now Uttarakhand) .. Respondent(s) With CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1106 of 2015 (@ SLP(Crl.) No.6249 of 2014) JUDGMENT C. NAGAPPAN, J.Leave granted. These two appeals are preferred against the common judgment dated 2.4.2014 of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital, in Criminal Appeal No.68 of 2003 and Criminal Appeal No.96 of 2003. Both the appellants were accused nos. 1 and 2 in S. T. No.80 of 1998 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) Almora and they were tried for the offences under Section 307 and 452 of Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court found them guilty of both the charges and sentenced them each to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default to undergo imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 307 IPC and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.629 OF2006STATE OF PUNJAB ...APPELLANT VERSUS M/S. BANDEEP SINGH & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH C.A. No.630 of 2006 PUNJAB STATE LEATHER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & ORS. ...APELLANTS VERSUS BANDEEP SINGH & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J.1 These Appeals assail the Judgment dated 20.9.2005 of the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.9621 of 2004. The factual matrix is that pursuant to an Auction Notice dated 1.5.2004 issued by the Managing Director, Punjab State Leather Development Corporation Ltd., several properties, of which we are only concerned with two, were to be put to a public auction. The salient terms as contained in the auction Notice required the interested persons to deposit an amount of [pic].2,00,000/- as Earnest Money; the successful bidder would have to deposit twenty five per cent of the auction amount at the conclusion of the bidding, and the remaining...
Tag this Judgment!